Nareau
Explorer
This is not a troll. I don't want to start a meaningless shouting match about politics, morality, or religion.
That said, I recently read an article about how Buffy the Vampire Slayer contains an abundance of "conservative philosophy" (I'm not sure I agree with that sentiment, but that's not my point). The basic premise for the article was that both BtVS and conservative philosophy were strongly based on the idea that there exist clearly defined concepts of Good and Evil.
I don't know much about the basis of conservative philosophy, but the things I've read seem to support this idea. It seems to center around the idea that morality is an absolute standard, defined by an outside authority (often God). This is in opposition to the liberal philosophy that morality is a flexible concept, defined more by personal beliefs, social norms, and circumstances.
Most of the discussions I've seen on the boards that deal with alignment don't make this kind of distinction. I propose that the D&D alignment system is a deeply conservative one. Good is good, Evil is evil. These tenets are even provable in the D&D world (through the use of Detect Evil type spells). It is difficult for us as players to come to terms with this kind of morality, because most of us were raised to adhere to a philosophically liberal system of morality.
What do you think? I know there are some people out there who can explain conservative philosophy better than I can. Have I got it right? And do people think that I'm right in blaming this disparity for the difficulty players have with the alignment system? In that case, what's the solution?
Should Detect Evil only ping to people who commit certain acts that are clearly defined by the church/deity of the caster? In my game, a Detect Evil might ping to someone who's worst crime is torturing kittens to death. Clerics and Paladins stress this idea--if someone appears "Evil," that's not reason enough to kill them. It's usually reason enough to investigate them.
Or should it be more flexible? Should it ping to anyone who does anything questionable (like kill sleeping Orc babies)?
That said, I recently read an article about how Buffy the Vampire Slayer contains an abundance of "conservative philosophy" (I'm not sure I agree with that sentiment, but that's not my point). The basic premise for the article was that both BtVS and conservative philosophy were strongly based on the idea that there exist clearly defined concepts of Good and Evil.
I don't know much about the basis of conservative philosophy, but the things I've read seem to support this idea. It seems to center around the idea that morality is an absolute standard, defined by an outside authority (often God). This is in opposition to the liberal philosophy that morality is a flexible concept, defined more by personal beliefs, social norms, and circumstances.
Most of the discussions I've seen on the boards that deal with alignment don't make this kind of distinction. I propose that the D&D alignment system is a deeply conservative one. Good is good, Evil is evil. These tenets are even provable in the D&D world (through the use of Detect Evil type spells). It is difficult for us as players to come to terms with this kind of morality, because most of us were raised to adhere to a philosophically liberal system of morality.
What do you think? I know there are some people out there who can explain conservative philosophy better than I can. Have I got it right? And do people think that I'm right in blaming this disparity for the difficulty players have with the alignment system? In that case, what's the solution?
Should Detect Evil only ping to people who commit certain acts that are clearly defined by the church/deity of the caster? In my game, a Detect Evil might ping to someone who's worst crime is torturing kittens to death. Clerics and Paladins stress this idea--if someone appears "Evil," that's not reason enough to kill them. It's usually reason enough to investigate them.
Or should it be more flexible? Should it ping to anyone who does anything questionable (like kill sleeping Orc babies)?
